I don't understand. My question is: What do you mean when you say Tommy Cryer must have "come up with something new" to "get this far"? Looking at the docket, I don't understand what you're driving at.

...why is anyone in this [losthorizons] community paying the least attention to...'Larry Williams' [Famspear], or other purveyors of disinformation from...quatloos? – Pete Hendrickson, former inmate 15406-039, Fed’l Bureau of Prisons

Famspear wrote:I don't understand. My question is: What do you mean when you say Tommy Cryer must have "come up with something new" to "get this far"? Looking at the docket, I don't understand what you're driving at.

In the other thread Dan made the following post:

by LPC on Thu Apr 09, 2009 11:39 am

"The petition sure looks like the first step towards sanctions, because it violates Tax Court rule 34(a), which requires that petitions be "complete, so as to enable ascertainment of the issues intended to be presented" and rule 34(b)(4), which requires "clear and concise assignments of each and every error which the petitioner alleges to have been committed."

Simply claiming "mathematically incorrect" and "without basis in fact or law" is a path to dismissal with sanctions."

I thought if Cryer had nothing new a motion to dismiss with sanctions would be the result.

Cryer in Tax CourtA collection of old posts from all forums. No new threads or new posts in old threads allowed. For archive use only. 53 posts • Page 3 of 3 • 1, 2, 3 What results should we expect for Cryer in Tax Court

He raises non-frivolous issues and wins. 12% He raises non-frivolous issues and loses. 514% He raises frivolous issues, but backs down after warnings from the court and settles. 720% He raises frivolous issues, persists, and loses, but is not sanctioned. 411% He raises frivolous issues, persists, loses, and is sanctioned. 1750% Total votes : 34

...why is anyone in this [losthorizons] community paying the least attention to...'Larry Williams' [Famspear], or other purveyors of disinformation from...quatloos? – Pete Hendrickson, former inmate 15406-039, Fed’l Bureau of Prisons

If the IRS wants to object to Cryer's motion for continuance, the objection must be filed by Thursday, December 16th.

...why is anyone in this [losthorizons] community paying the least attention to...'Larry Williams' [Famspear], or other purveyors of disinformation from...quatloos? – Pete Hendrickson, former inmate 15406-039, Fed’l Bureau of Prisons

Once bitten, twice shy ? Continue until hell freezes over or Cryer dies ? Or what?

Cryer DOJ

What are you driving at, Noah? The DOJ filed a notice that it does not object, and today, December 21st, the Court approved the continuance. Sounds like you're straining to read something into this.

...why is anyone in this [losthorizons] community paying the least attention to...'Larry Williams' [Famspear], or other purveyors of disinformation from...quatloos? – Pete Hendrickson, former inmate 15406-039, Fed’l Bureau of Prisons

Thanks for the added insight, but this is a higher profile case than the usual and the fact that the first motion to continue was a joint motion signifies a change in position/positions however small. Maybe I am looking too fine.

I'm also guessing that the prosecution doesn't want to ruin the Christmas holidays getting ready for trial.

"We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture." -- Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA, during an attempt to introduce creationism -- er, "intelligent design", into the Dover Public Schools

There is also the possibility that the pre-trial stipulations and admissions have reduced the number of triable issues to the point where they can be resolved by negotiations leading up to a stipulated decision.

Cryer may be a jerk, but he isn't necessarily stupid. If he is looking at the handwriting on the wall, he just might be attempting to reduce the financial impact of his case.

Dr. Caligari wrote:The Department of Justice does not litigate in tax Court. The Commissioner is represented in Tax Court by lawyers from the IRS's Chief Counsel's Office.

Yes; I guess I'm not paying attention.

...why is anyone in this [losthorizons] community paying the least attention to...'Larry Williams' [Famspear], or other purveyors of disinformation from...quatloos? – Pete Hendrickson, former inmate 15406-039, Fed’l Bureau of Prisons

Noah wrote:Thanks for the added insight, but this is a higher profile case than the usual and the fact that the first motion to continue was a joint motion signifies a change in position/positions however small. Maybe I am looking too fine.

You are "looking too fine."

By the way, Noah: Cryer is the one asking for the delay here, not the government. Cryer is the one who is ostensibly not ready for a January trial. It doesn't make much sense to try to imply that the government is somehow afraid of Cryer's case, when it's Cryer who brought the case and Cryer who is asking for the delay.

Aside from the benefits to both sides that may accrue from a postponement, in terms of giving both sides additional time to prepare this case (and to handle other pressing cases in the mean time), there is a separate benefit to Cryer -- in that this puts off the date on which he will ultimately have to cough up some money for the tax.

Cryer might not be in quite the difficult position he is in today if he had just filed correct tax returns in the first place. The notices of deficiency issued by the IRS might well have overstated Cryer's tax liabilities -- simply because Cryer has not provided complete and accurate information to the IRS. The IRS probably computed the taxes based on the limited information available to the IRS. Cryer might have lots of deductions not included in the IRS computations and, of course, it's Cryer's responsibility to file tax returns that include those deductions if Cryer wants the tax to be computed correctly.

...why is anyone in this [losthorizons] community paying the least attention to...'Larry Williams' [Famspear], or other purveyors of disinformation from...quatloos? – Pete Hendrickson, former inmate 15406-039, Fed’l Bureau of Prisons

Plus, considering that it is Cryer we are talking about, it is more than likely that he is not now, nor will be then ready to mount any kind of defense. So far, his efforts have been lackluster at best, and i am betting he is stalling as the only option he has left. I just don't see it making any real difference one way or the other whether he goes to trial now, or later. The result is going to be the same one way or another.

The fact that you sincerely and wholeheartedly believe that the “Law of Gravity” is unconstitutional and a violation of your sovereign rights, does not absolve you of adherence to it.